Re: [PATCH v2 4/5] ARM: dts: imx6sl: fix mmc compatibles

[Andreas Kemnade]

On Mon, 27 Sep 2021 09:34:57 +0200
Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> On Sun, 26 Sept 2021 at 20:33, Andreas Kemnade <andreas@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Ahmad,
> >
> > On Sun, 26 Sep 2021 08:54:35 +0200
> > Ahmad Fatoum <a.fatoum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >  
> > > Hello Andreas,
> > >
> > > On 24.09.21 11:14, Andreas Kemnade wrote:  
> > > > Binding specification only allows one compatible here.  
> > >
> > > This same change was NACKed by Lucas here:
> > > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-devicetree/72e1194e10ccb4f87aed96265114f0963e805092.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx/
> > >
> > > I also think the schema should be fixed instead.
> > >  
> > well, that argumentation makes sense. Feel free to drop this patch. I
> > will not repost the series if it is just about dropping patches.  
> 
> The argument of using a new DTB with an old kernel, therefore
> prohibiting changes in new DTB, does not make that much sense, except
> when caring about other systems which would like to directly reuse the
> DTB... anyway it's not that important to fight over it.
> 
hmm, imx6sl_data specifies
ESDHC_FLAG_ERR004536 
imx6sq_data does not specify it.

Than there is  ESDHC_FLAG_STD_TUNING vs. ESDHC_FLAG_MAN_TUNING.
So it the fsl,imx6q-usdhc really a technically valid fallback compatible?

Regards,
Andreas